Islamic bow for I.D. and comment

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

[QUOTE=Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

"From medieval times through the nineteenth century, archers of the Islamic crescent, stretching from Turkey eastward to India, were renowned for both their exceptional skills and superior weapons. As a necessary means of advancing the spread of Islam, weapons traditionally held a religious association in Muslim cultures. The bow and arrow, which are extolled in many sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, held a special place above all others. Training in archery was seen as a religious duty and a sign of status, and the craftmanship of archery equipment was highly esteemed. The legacy of Islamic archery is exemplified by the archery traditions and equipment of Ottoman Turkey (1453–1922), of Iran during the Safavid–Qajar periods (1502–1925), and of the Indian subcontinent throughout the Mughal era (1526–1857), which blended Islamic and Hindu cultural elements"

Just for precison, Ibrahim, though I don't disagree with the cultural and religious importance of archery in the Muslim culture, the role of archery, its cultural importance and even the type of bow from the Persians, Ottomans, Mughal and Mamluke dynasties in India, does not derive from their religion, but from their Central Asian cultural and military heritage. It was there before the islamization of the Persians and Turks and is the same of that of the Mongols, and before them the Partians and Scythians, Hsiung-nu and many others. Remember that the Ottomans and Seljuks were only part of an inmense confederation of the Oghuz Turks, who roamed in the Eurasian steppe and just latter some of them converted to Islam. The same apply to the Mongols and Turks integrated in a Central Asian Empire which is the origin of the Mughals of India. Maybe Islam reinforced this cultural current, or maybe it was the other way around, that this pre-existing culture of archery among those peoples reinforced that of the already had by the Islamic conquerors who spread their religion to Persia and part of Central Asia.

Regards

Salaams Gonzalo G, Firstly many thanks for posting on this great subject which for too long has gone un-examined by Forum. I had a reasonable go at introducing the subject at the European and it is nice to see this thread gathering pace on Ethnographic. By chance it seems that the Turkish Foot Bow and the Welsh Long never came into deadly combat with each other. The extraordinary greater range of the Turkish Bow would certainly have sent the opposition back to the drawing board I suspect.
Regarding the religious context I think it has been viewed out of context... It was a quote from https://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/g...icarchery.shtml which I consider not inaccurate neither does it say the bow was derived from religion ...in fact it goes on to say ~

Quote" The legacy of Islamic archery is exemplified by the archery traditions and equipment of Ottoman Turkey (1453–1922), of Iran during the Safavid–Qajar periods (1502–1925), and of the Indian subcontinent throughout the Mughal era (1526–1857), which blended Islamic and Hindu cultural elements"Unquote. What perhaps it did not underline was where the earlier concept derived from, however, I think it was inferred that people understood the origin..for which the Mongolian Archer is clearly the pointer.

I think emphasis on Blended. Certainly as I read it there was no inference on ownership of style belonging to the religion...but that surely they observed a formidable weapon and adapted and adopted the system and built a military structure around its training in the case of the Turks with their Janissaries and the Mamluke with their recruits taken often as young as 6 years old from the Steppes.

Moreover the subject is a fascinating one and I hope more members can get involved ... Pinterest is bombarding my mail with all things archery and I am certain good photographic evidence will add to the thread in due course.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Turkic warriors guarding the Doors of Tamerlane. Tamerlane, anglicized form of Timur-i-Lang ('Lame Timur' or 'Timur the Lame') (1336-1404), was a Turkic conqueror, born in Kash near Samarkand. He waged several devastating wars, conquering Persia (1392-96) and northern India (1398), and defeating the Ottomans and the Mamlukes (1402)

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by colin henshaw

Hi Ibrahiim

Thanks for your input. Yes, I think I will make a study of Asian & Islamic archery, it seems interesting. Was the bow and arrow ever used in Arabia ?

Regards

Salaams Colin~ It would seem so. Here are some publications below. There aren't a lot of books on the subject in fact the blue book and the book with the Arab archer are the same with the latter being a reprint.

I put the European archery book in here for interest...

See here for a translation of the blue book https://www.archerylibrary.com/books.../arab-archery/

[Victrix]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Treaty of the military art Mamelouk, containing the schools of platoon, rider, infantryman, archer and crossbowman. A large number of colored and rather well-drawn figures are inserted in the text. Like all Arab works on the same subject, this treatise contains a large number of technical terms and terms of command.

Beginning: الحمد لله ذى العظمة المتعالى بالقدرة عن الصفات و الامثال. This ms. Was executed in 875 of the Hegira (1470 AD), for a great personage of the court of the Sultans Mameluk, whose name was carefully removed from the frontispiece, which is very ornate. However, the last words contained in the central medallion, namely: عزه الله تعالى, which indicates that the last name was that of a sultan. Gold, The ruler of Egypt at that time was Qaitbai. Between the folios currently rated 1 and 2, several sheets are missing.

Some years ago I read a fascinating book called The Knights of Islam, The Wars of the Mamluks (2007) by James Waterson which may be of interest.

[Philip]

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

Pity that Philip is on the other side of the border, for if he would be instead on Texas, I could cross the border to talk with him.

Regards

California is also right next to the Mexican border. Even if we secede from the Union as some wild-eyed dreamers are talking about, we will still be right next to your country. Just come quick before the wall gets too high :-)

Although if you REALLY want to know all about Manchu archery, it would be wise to make a trip to meet Peter Dekker (and perhaps do some shooting) in Amsterdam. I am overdue for a return visit, myself! But I see that you are familiar with his informative websites on the subject, so that's good.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Victrix

Some years ago I read a fascinating book called The Knights of Islam, The Wars of the Mamluks (2007) by James Waterson which may be of interest.

APPARENTLY THERE IS A FREE DOWNLOAD...CHECKING.. WRITE UP STATES~

The Mamluks were, at one distinct point in history, the greatest body of fighting men in the world and the quintessence of the mounted warrior. They were slave soldiers, imported as boys into the Islamic Empire from the pagan Steppes, but they became its savior, bringing defeat to the Mongols and forming the machine of jihad that ultimately destroyed the Crusader Kingdoms of Palestine and Syria. They entered the Islamic world as unlettered automatons and through a total application to the craft of the warrior they became more than soldiers. After a bloody seizure of power from their masters, the descendants of Saladin, they developed a martial code and an honor system based on barracks brotherhood, a sophisticated military society that harnessed the state's energies for total war and produced a series of treatises on warfare that more than compare to SunZi's Art of War in their complexity, beauty of language and comprehensive coverage of the bloody business of war. Their story embraces many of the great themes of medieval military endeavor. The Crusaders and the deadly contest between Islam and Christendom, the Mongols and their vision of World Dominion, Tamerlane the Scourge of God and the rise of the Ottoman Empire whose new slave soldiers, the Janissaries, would be the Mamluks' final nemesis.

Another review says~ In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Quote"
Reviewed by
John Dunn
The Knights of Islam: The Wars of the Mamluks. By James Waterson. St.Paul, Minn.: MBI Publishing, 2007. ISBN 978-1-85367-734-2.

"Slave-soldiers?" " Owned Men?" However you translate Mamluk, James Waterson's account of their long history deserves your consideration. He takes you from their beginnings, when Arab leaders purchased Central Asian boys for conversion, both to Islam and as bodyguards, all the way to the end of their story – early 19th Century Egypt. During the 1000 plus years separating these events, Mamluks not only play a critical role in domestic politics, but also figure prominently in thwarting both European Crusaders and several Mongol invasions of the Middle East.
These latter events show the Mamluks at their best, when their tremendous skills as horsemen and warriors allowed for history-altering victories like Ayn Jalut (1260), or the fall of Acre (1291). Waterson shows how Mamluk armies, almost exclusively cavalry, managed to be both good horse archers, and excellent shock troops. He also illustrates their significant skills at siege warfare, and use of "catapults."
Even after their apogee in the 1200s, Mamluks figure prominently in the military affairs of North East Africa and the Near East. The Knights of Islam details this, especially the 1300s-1500s, when Mamluk armies, though in decline, were still capable of defeating the Ottoman Empire when directed by smart leaders like Kayitbay. Waterson continues their story, even after the Ottoman conquest of Egypt in 1516, for Mamluks influenced that nation's history into the 1800s, while they also influenced Ottoman military culture.
Although wars and battles figure prominently, as they should in any account of Mamluks, Waterson does not leave out politics, economic matters, recruitment, or training. This reader liked his explanation of Furusiyya – a set of training lessons that began when Mamluks reached [End Page 227] 13/14, and included horsemanship plus weapons handling. He also makes very clear the most serious flaw within this system – internal rivalries between household forces of rival Mamluk leaders, often so intense that they played into the hands of foreign enemies.
These details and many more, are well covered in The Knights of Islam. Waterson's clear writing is enhanced by a strong command of the secondary literature, and good use of translated primary sources. His text is nicely organized, supported by a glossary, maps, a time-line, plus a first-rate collection of color photos, and a useful bibliography.
Specialists may argue on a few issues, pointing out that Egypt's Muhammad Ali can not be shortened to "Ali," or asking the photo editor to reconsider plate 37, which is dated to the "1880s," even though the British soldiers clearly have Wolseley pattern sun helmets. Most readers, however, should find the Knights of Islam interesting. It could benefit parties focused on Medieval, Islamic, Egyptian, or military history." Unquote.

[Timo Nieminen]

A bibliography of Asian archery (books only).

Primary sources:

Faris & Elmer, "Arab Archery", noted and linked upthread

Latham, J. D., W. F. Paterson, and Ṭaybughā, "Saracen Archery: An English Version and Exposition of a Mameluke Work on Archery (Ca. A.D. 1368)", London: Holland P., 1970.
http://pgmagirlscouts.files.wordpres...en_archery.pdf

Jie Tian & Justin Ma, "The Way of Archery"
https://www.amazon.com/Way-Archery-C...dp/0764347918/

Stephen Selby, "Chinese Archery"
Not a single primary source, but a collection of a variety of sources. Gives the original and a translation in English, plus discussion.
https://www.amazon.com/Chinese-Arche...dp/9622095011/

Joseph Needham & Robin D. S. Yates, "Science and Civilisation in China: Volume 5, Chemistry and Chemical Technology; Part 6, Military Technology: Missiles and Sieges"
Not a single primary source, but a collection of a variety of sources.
https://www.amazon.com/Science-Civil...dp/052132727X/
https://archive.org/stream/ScienceAn...les_and_Sieges

Modern sources:

Manouchehr Moshtagh Khorasani, "Persian Archery and Swordsmanship"
http://www.freelanceacademypress.com...dsmanship.aspx

Paul Klopsteg, "Turkish Archery". Recently reprinted, and cheap!
https://www.amazon.com/Turkish-Arche...dp/1684220092/

Adam Karpowicz, "Ottoman Turkish bows"
https://www.amazon.com/Ottoman-Turki...dp/B013MCOYMW/

G.N. Pant, "Indian Archery"
https://www.amazon.com/Indian-Archer...dp/8173200149/

Charles E. Grayson, "Traditional Archery from Six Continents"
https://www.amazon.com/Traditional-A...dp/0826217516/

Stephen Selby, "Archery Traditions of Asia"
http://www.atarn.org/commercial/traditions.htm

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

PLEASE SEE ~
AND SIMPLY COPY THIS STRING INTO YOUR WEB SEARCH WINDOW

file:///C:/Users/Peeter/AppData/Local/Temp/Rar$DI00.156/Arab%20Archery.pdf

FOR AN EXCELLENT FULL AND FREE VERSION OF THE TRANSLATED ARAB ARCHERY BOOK

This entire book is out of copyright and free for anyone to download.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

The Mamluks were, at one distinct point in history, the greatest body of fighting men in the world and the quintessence of the mounted warrior............... the Ottoman Empire whose new slave soldiers, the Janissaries, would be the Mamluks' final nemesis.

Actually I believe it was not the Janissaries that finally defeated the Mamluks, it was Muhammad Ali Pasha, an Ottoman Albanian general who defeated the Egyptian Mamluks in the early 1800s. After the withdrawal of the French occupiers of Egypt, Muhammad Ali Pasha devised a plan to murder the whole remaining lot of them by luring Mamluk leaders to a celebration and ambushing them, the rest were eventually hunted down and killed, supposedly very few got away. Muhammad Ali Pasha declared himself the "khedive" of Egypt and interesting enough it was Europeans who controlled Egypt until the early 1900s.

[Timo Nieminen]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Turkic warriors guarding the Doors of Tamerlane.

Anachronistic art. They carry the Manchu/Qing bow, which spread west along the steppe after the Manchu conquest of Mongolia (which was post-Timurid). Bows derived from the Manchu bow were used as far west as the Crimea, from where they influence European and Turkish bows. AFAIK, the Turkish and European versions (often about 4' long) weren't as big as the Crimean ones, which were often smaller than the Manchu/Chinese ones (like 5' vs 5.5' to 6').

[Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

I think emphasis on Blended. Certainly as I read it there was no inference on ownership of style belonging to the religion...but that surely they observed a formidable weapon and adapted and adopted the system and built a military structure around its training in the case of the Turks with their Janissaries and the Mamluke with their recruits taken often as young as 6 years old from the Steppes.

Salam aleikum, Ibrahim, peace be upon you. I am sorry if I misuderstood the quote, I just tried to extend the scope of Ottoman and Indian Mogol-Mamluke archery to the whole nomadic peoples of Central Asia. I know arab archery is ancient and has its own traditions. And that they were an open and sophisticated people who also incorporated every scientific, cultural and technological valuable asset they found among other peoples.
Regards

P.D. Thank you for the string to the Arab archery book, but I introduced it to my web search window...and noting happened, I mean, it did not open a page with the book. Maybe I did something wrong, please advise me.

[Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by Philip

California is also right next to the Mexican border. Even if we secede from the Union as some wild-eyed dreamers are talking about, we will still be right next to your country. Just come quick before the wall gets too high :-)

Although if you REALLY want to know all about Manchu archery, it would be wise to make a trip to meet Peter Dekker (and perhaps do some shooting) in Amsterdam. I am overdue for a return visit, myself! But I see that you are familiar with his informative websites on the subject, so that's good.

Yes, but I am at the opposite side, bordering east Texas. Very far. As for the Great Wall, don´t worry. We are already organizing teams for the national contest to see who goes up-under-around the Great Wall faster. The China lesson....

Sadly, I can't go even to the next town, less Amsterdam. Snif...

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

PLEASE SEE ~
AND SIMPLY COPY THIS STRING INTO YOUR WEB SEARCH WINDOW

file:///C:/Users/Peeter/AppData/Local/Temp/Rar$DI00.156/Arab%20Archery.pdf

FOR AN EXCELLENT FULL AND FREE VERSION OF THE TRANSLATED ARAB ARCHERY BOOK

This entire book is out of copyright and free for anyone to download.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Ibrahimm, link not working...if it is for this book here is a link. Arab Archery An Arabic manuscript of about A.D. 1500 “Book on the Excellence of the Bow and Arrow” and the Description thereof.

http://www.freepdf.info/index.php?post/Arab-Archery

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Ibrahimm, link not working...if it is for this book here is a link. Arab Archery An Arabic manuscript of about A.D. 1500 “Book on the Excellence of the Bow and Arrow” and the Description thereof.

http://www.freepdf.info/index.php?post/Arab-Archery

It works for me... Just copy the string straight into your web search window... It should work... Shoot again !

There are quite a few ways into the document and heres another https://www.archerylibrary.com/books.../arab-archery/ where you simply go down the list and press on a link ... It also has other good archery links...

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

It works for me... Just copy the string straight into your web search window... It should work... Shoot again !

Try it, I think something is missing, your linkis for the same book I posted a link to.
file:///C:/Users/Peeter/AppData/Loca...%20Archery.pdf

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Put this into search as a complete string

file:///C:/Users/Peeter/AppData/Local/Temp/Rar$DI00.156/Arab%20Archery.pdf



My string works but yours does not....

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Put this into search as a complete string

file:///C:/Users/Peeter/AppData/Local/Temp/Rar$DI00.156/Arab%20Archery.pdf

Been there, done that, it does not work, check and see if you copied it correctly.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Yes that works. It will give the entire book... I used the string you have and both that and my string are working...

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

Salam aleikum, Ibrahim, peace be upon you. I am sorry if I misuderstood the quote, I just tried to extend the scope of Ottoman and Indian Mogol-Mamluke archery to the whole nomadic peoples of Central Asia. I know arab archery is ancient and has its own traditions. And that they were an open and sophisticated people who also incorporated every scientific, cultural and technological valuable asset they found among other peoples.
Regards

P.D. Thank you for the string to the Arab archery book, but I introduced it to my web search window...and noting happened, I mean, it did not open a page with the book. Maybe I did something wrong, please advise me.

Ensure you copy the string and put into web search...It works for me....

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Actually I believe it was not the Janissaries that finally defeated the Mamluks, it was Muhammad Ali Pasha, an Ottoman Albanian general who defeated the Egyptian Mamluks in the early 1800s. After the withdrawal of the French occupiers of Egypt, Muhammad Ali Pasha devised a plan to murder the whole remaining lot of them by luring Mamluk leaders to a celebration and ambushing them, the rest were eventually hunted down and killed, supposedly very few got away. Muhammad Ali Pasha declared himself the "khedive" of Egypt and interesting enough it was Europeans who controlled Egypt until the early 1900s.

Yes correct but he used his Janissaries to do the deed ...The Mamluks were surrounded and shot to pieces. Only one got away and of the few others that were not at that wipe out... They were mostly hunted down and killed.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Yes correct but he used his Janissaries to do the deed ...The Mamluks were surrounded and shot to pieces. Only one got away and of the few others that were not at that wipe out... They were mostly hunted down and killed.

According to everything that I have read he used his Albanian troops, he then basically took control over Egypt and the Ottoman government could do nothing to stop him.

Wikipedia.
"The French withdrawal left a power vacuum in Egypt. Mamluk power had been weakened, but not destroyed, and Ottoman forces clashed with the Mamluks for power. During this period of turmoil Muhammad Ali used his loyal Albanian troops to work with both sides, gaining power and prestige for himself......The Mamluks still posed the greatest threat to Muhammad Ali. They controlled Egypt for more than 600 years, and over that time they extended their rule systematically south along the Nile River to Upper Egypt. Muhammad Ali’s approach was to eliminate the Mamluk leadership, then move against the rank and file. Muhammad Ali invited the Mamluk leaders to a celebration at the Cairo Citadel in honor of his son, Tusun Pasha, who was to lead a military expedition into Arabia. The event was held on March 1, 1811. When the Mamluks had gathered at the Citadel, and were surrounded by Muhammad Ali's troops, he had his troops kill them. After the leaders were killed, Muhammad Ali dispatched his army throughout Egypt to rout the remainder of the Mamluk forces."

[Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Actually I believe it was not the Janissaries that finally defeated the Mamluks, it was Muhammad Ali Pasha, an Ottoman Albanian general who defeated the Egyptian Mamluks in the early 1800s. After the withdrawal of the French occupiers of Egypt, Muhammad Ali Pasha devised a plan to murder the whole remaining lot of them by luring Mamluk leaders to a celebration and ambushing them, the rest were eventually hunted down and killed, supposedly very few got away. Muhammad Ali Pasha declared himself the "khedive" of Egypt and interesting enough it was Europeans who controlled Egypt until the early 1900s.

I am sorry, estcrh, but the Mamluk Sultanate was defeated and destroyed as such by Selim I in 1516, beign the Mamluks no match for the Ottoman artillery and janissaries. Since then, the Mamluks were the already defeated and decadent subjects of the Ottoman Empire which, in the time of the French invassion, also was in decadence (as all empires will be, and vanish, sic transit gloria mundi). They were defeated on the battlefield by the Ottomans, and not by treason. Muhammad Ali Pasha only recovered Egypt. And since the Mamluks were already unruly and useless, he killed their leaders in an ambush. As many christian kings and princes did in their time in Europe. From then he was only nominal subordinate of the Ottomans, given the fact that the aforementioned empire was in total decadence, as said.

Regards

P.D. Already downloaded the book from the estcrh's link. It is the same. Thank you very much to both of you.

[Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by Timo Nieminen

Anachronistic art. They carry the Manchu/Qing bow, which spread west along the steppe after the Manchu conquest of Mongolia (which was post-Timurid). Bows derived from the Manchu bow were used as far west as the Crimea, from where they influence European and Turkish bows. AFAIK, the Turkish and European versions (often about 4' long) weren't as big as the Crimean ones, which were often smaller than the Manchu/Chinese ones (like 5' vs 5.5' to 6').

I agree on the anachronism, but specifically in which way Manchu bows influenced the Turk bows? By Turks you meant the Ottomans? Because there are many Turkic peoples, from nort-west China to south-west Russia, not to mention the Ottomans. Do you mean all of them?

Regards

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

They were defeated on the battlefield by the Ottomans, and not by treason.

Gonzalo, I did not say that the Egyptian Mamluks were defeated by treason, I said that the Mamluks were not defeated in Egypt by the Janassaries, the treason was Ali taking control over Egypt and proclaiming himself as the "Khedive".

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

It woz Ali Pasha wot done it !!!

[estcrh]

The bow was found in Japan, an unusual place to find an Indo-Persian bow. It is covered with illustrations, cows or bulls and military men, I am thinking that this is a Persian portrait, any thoughts would be helpful.

[Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Ganzalo, I did not say that the Egyptian Mamluks were defeated by treason, I said that the Mamluks were not defeated in Egypt by the Janassaries, the treason was Ali taking control over Egypt and proclaiming himself as the "Khedive".

Ok, sorry for that, estcrh. But at that time the Mamluks were only the problematic and unruly subjects of the Ottomans, already defeated but kept by the Ottomans to manage Egypt for them. Not anymore the great Mamluks who defeated the Mongol armies. They were defeated by fireweapons and more modern tactics, since although they have some fireweapons, they didn´t learn how to use and produce them properly. That, and all the complexities involved in the decadence of their own sultanate in the 16th Century. The same happened to the so called "Tatars", Uzbeks, Kazaks, etc. with the Russian Empire, or to the Mongols with the Chinese-Manchu Empire. A mix of social, economic, historical and technological and military factors. Which, among other things, conducted to the decadence of archery.

Regards

[Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by estcrh

The bow was found in Japan, an unusual place to find an Indo-Persian bow. It is covered with illustrations, cows or bulls and military men, I am thinking that this is a Persian portrait, any thoughts would be helpful.

I am not an expert on this field (or any other), but the portrait seems to be Naser al-Din Shah Qajar, though I can be mistaken. He conducted intense diplomatic activities. Maybe a diplomatic gift to Japan rulers? After all, he searched for allies on the whole world against the Russians, and the Japanese could be taken as natural allies at that moment.

Thank you for all your photographs, estcrh.

Regards

[Timo Nieminen]

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

I agree on the anachronism, but specifically in which way Manchu bows influenced the Turk bows? By Turks you meant the Ottomans? Because there are many Turkic peoples, from nort-west China to south-west Russia, not to mention the Ottomans. Do you mean all of them?

By "Turkish" here, I mean the Turkish subjects of the Ottomans. The European bows I refer to are AFAIK European subjects of the Ottomans. (For Turkic peoples outside Turkey, I'll usually use "Turkic" rather than "Turkish".)

AFAIK, the Mongol adoption of the Manchu bow was driven by the Manchu conquest of Mongolia. After the Mongolian Mongols adopted it, then it spread to Moghulistan, and next to Mawarannahr/Transoxiana (under Uzbek rule by then), and then to the Crimean Khanate. By the time the Manchu bow reaches Crimea, it's shrunk a bit (but is still a big bow) - smaller ears, smaller string bridge, and also less reflexed.

The Crimean Khanate being an Ottoman protectorate, the Ottomans are exposed to this bow. At which point, bows appear in the Ottoman Empire which are intermediate in size between the traditional Ottoman bow and the Crimean/Manchu bow. The new bows are about 50"/125cm long, as compared with the traditional 40"/100cm bows, and the 60"/160cm Crimean/Manchu bow (and the 66"-72"/170-180cm Manchu/Qing bow).

[Gonzalo G]

Thank you for your reply, Timo. The Ottoman bows I have seen does not have the siyah-ears big and so rigid (so it seems) like the Manchu. But I have only seen some Ottoman and Manchu bows in pictures, never seen one personally, and they look different. The Manchu bow seem more "Hunnish", but symmetrical. I have only elemental knowledge of the historic composite bow from the Orient, that's why I asked for the specific influences, like beign more robust, bigger than the originals, siyah bigger or more rigid, different profiles-curvatures-proportions, etc.
I also wonder if those Timurid warriors should carry their swords edge up.

Regards